Hindu Singh Chundawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 12534 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hindu Singh Chundawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through ... on 3 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                                     1
                          IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT INDORE
                                                   BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                             ON THE 3 rd OF MAY, 2024
                                         WRIT PETITION No. 11860 of 2024

                         BETWEEN:-
                         HINDU SINGH CHUNDAWAT S/O LATE SHRI RAMSINGH
                         CHUNDAWAT, AGE: ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                         PENSIONER, R/O: 272/472, EWS, INDIRA NAGAR, AGAR
                         ROAD, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                         (BY SHRI YASH NAGAR - ADVOCATE.)

                         AND
                         1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
                               PRINCIPAL     SECRETARY,     GENERAL
                               ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMET
                               OF MADHYA PRADESH, BHOPAL, DISTRICT
                               BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    AVAR     SACHIV      "KARMIK", GENERAL
                               ADMINISTRATION   DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF
                               MADHYA PRADESH, BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         3.    DIVISIONAL  PENSION     OFFICER, DISTRICT
                               BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         4.    DIVISIONAL  JOINT    DIRECTOR, TREASURY,
                               ACCOUNTS   AND    PENSION, UJJAIN UJJAIN
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         5.    COLLECTOR AT SHAJAPUR, COLLECTORATE
                               OFFICE,  DISTRICT SHAJAPUR  (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         6.    DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, DISTRICT UJJAIN
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                            .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY   SHRI   RAJWARDHAN   GAWDE    -   GOVERNMENT    ADVOCATE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAMESH
CHANDRA PITHAWE
Signing time: 5/3/2024
5:21:03 PM
                                                    2
                         APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE GENERAL.)

                                This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                               ORDER

By the instant petition, the petitioner is claiming that although he / she

stood retired on 30.06.2016 and the annual increment was to be added on 1st of July of that year, but he / she was not granted the said benefit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the

present case has already been settled on 11 th April, 2023 by the Supreme Court recently in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 (@ SLP (C) No.6185 of 2020) [The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCK and Ors. v. C.P.

Mundinamani & Ors.] reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 296, wherein it has

been held that benefit of annual increment which was to be added on 1st of July

every year shall be paid to the employee who got retired on 30th of June of the said year, therefore, the present petitioner is also entitled to get the said benefit.

3. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by Supreme Court in case of C.P. Mundinamni (supra), this petition is allowed, directing the respondents to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to be added with effect from 01.07.2016 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension and issue fresh Pension Payment Order (PPO) in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of submitting copy of this Court's order.

4. Since there is delay in approaching the Court, thus petitioner shall not be entitled for entire arrears / interest, however, the same shall be payable to him / her from the last three years as well as due annual increment only. PPO be accordingly revised.

5. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands allowed.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE rcp